Tim Worstall

John Smith: Insane.

A proposal from a certain John Smith.

ONE of Britain’s leading surgeons has called on
the government to introduce curbs on the sale of alcohol, limiting the
amount that customers can consume per visit to a pub or bar.

John Smith, president of the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh,
believes that such restrictions would be the logical next step to
improving the nation’s health following the ban on smoking in public
buildings.

Smith believes regulations in Britain could save lives while cutting alcohol-related illnesses and violent crime.

“The legislation to ban smoking in public places is very welcome
and a big step forward. The logical thing to recognise now is that
smoking is bad for you, as is alcohol,” he said.

“Should we now limit the amount of drink that can be served in
pubs? If, as a nation, we are serious about trying to prevent illnesses
associated with social habits, then this is something that must be
considered seriously.

“I think for a government to follow the American model of
saying, for the benefit of each patron, we will provide three drinks
only, would be very interesting to look at.”

The man is clearly insane. Can someone nip out and get a Section 44 order please? Leave aside the complete inanity of the proposal, that adults must be barred by law from doing as they wish when it hurts no one else.

Hasn’t the idiotic little fuckwit noted that there is more than one pub in the country?

In

10 responses

  1. Sir Andrew Siddle Avatar
    Sir Andrew Siddle

    Amen to that!
    There again I am biased. I have been of the
    opinion that the Labour party, in particular, are all mentally insane since the age of 14. But there again I only support the Conservative Party who have lacked a popular leader in more recent years.
    When I was a little younger we used to call them the loony left and make fun of of them.I won’t keep my mouth shut just because we have the moronic idiots in power at present!As predicted local council tax and income tax have increased at a much higher rate than inflation which always happens when Labour are in power.We have to have higher income tax to pay for all of the Billions of £ that Mr Prescott wasted to send leaflets,and marketing staff, to North Eastern people about the European regional assembly (which they rejected outright by the vote) as an example. Good old Two Jag’s Prescott hey!!What is a billion or two spent on marketing any way to somebody on the kind of salary that he gets? A mere drop in the ocean for sure!
    It is at times like this that Conservative Party members of the public normally consider moving to Australia or the USA to work out of an objection to the Goverment and their nanny state interference because we don’t want them.In the 1970’s this was called the “brain drain” and was completely the fault of the loony left Labour party administration as it became cheaper for UK professional and management staff to move to the USA than it would be to carry on living in the UK. It happens every single time that the Labour Party are in power! I have not, and never will, say a good word about any Labour Member of Parliament where ever they live on this ball of clay of ours. They are mad with a capital “M”.
    How many billions of £ will the limitation of alcohol sales per person cost the United Kindom citizen in tax per capita to administrate? More council tax increases and more income tax increases on their way folks!We pay for them to set up multi billion £ schemes to limit our freedom of life, in ways that restrict us, and are at our expense through higher direct and indirect taxation (It is like saying to Mr Blair….If I give you a fiver “£” from my wallet will you kick me in the teeth please your highness the most supreme President elect of the UK? -).
    It is enough to drive a man to the bottle!!!!
    Regards.
    Andrew Siddle.

    Reply
  2. Sir Andrew Siddle Avatar
    Sir Andrew Siddle

    It is interesting that alcohol restriction , per person, is a suggested model based upon something that is happening in the USA.Obviously the USA was the Home of 20th century prohibition policies which completely failed and also led to increased health problems due to the sale of illegal “boot leg” drink that was not subject to quality testing as it was an underground black market sub standard product.
    Maybe the USA can afford to administrate policies such as alcohol volume per person legislation. In the Uk we cannot.We are a small little island and it is becoming increasingly obvious that people don’t understand that if more and more draconian social policies are introduced then the result will be this:-
    A bankrupt country that can not afford it’s Government because they are too expensive.

    Reply
  3. Jean Avatar
    Jean

    WTF is he talking about? There is no 3 drinks per customer limit anywhere I’ve been in the US.

    Reply
  4. auntymarianne Avatar
    auntymarianne

    I’m not certain which drug has higher social and economic costs. If I had to guess, I suspect alcohol is the greater evil in terms of doing harm to others than yourself (car crashes, domestic violence, drunken punchups). By all rights it should therefore be banned BEFORE cigarettes.
    I’m told pot is a lot less socially damaging.
    Of course this is before you take into account the enormous tax revenues the tobacco and booze industries bribe governments with.
    It’s all very complex. I’ll have to go and mull it over a glass of Amarone.

    Reply
  5. Henning Avatar
    Henning

    “Hasn’t the idiotic little fuckwit noted that there is more than one pub in the country?”
    There will of course be a smart chip on your mandatory national ID card 😉

    Reply
  6. dco Avatar
    dco

    I’m almost certain this guy must have misunderstood the “Three Drink Minimum”, which is a frequent substitute for a door charge in some of America’s seedier bars.

    Reply
  7. Agammamon Avatar
    Agammamon

    “. . .American model of saying, for the benefit of each patron, we will provide three drinks only. . .”
    Having lived in most of the US over the years I can tell you that the “American Model” isn’t a three drink limit.
    Its to sue the bar after you get hurt because of your own stupidity when they serve you “too many” drinks.

    Reply
  8. dearieme Avatar
    dearieme

    Someone should just abolish the bus stops outside the Royal College and then he wouldn’t be embarrassed by the vomit on the pavement in the morning.

    Reply
  9. The Remittance Man Avatar
    The Remittance Man

    This would be a medical practitioner speaking, yes?
    I remember a time when Imperial College absorbed St Mary’s Teaching Hospital. The Medics were the only ones who could compete with the Miners when it came to near suicidal drinking (to be honest, they even scared us sometimes).
    Add to that the fact they smoked more than we did and played rugby with an enthusiasm last seen in Japanese kamikaze squadrons and I always find it difficult to take any of these medical experts’ pronouncements seriously. Methinks, I detect the scent of a Quango Chairman out to boost his budget.
    Oh, for the record, later experience in South Africa has only confirmed that medics rarely practice what they preach when it comes to booze, fags and assorted sins of the flesh.
    RM

    Reply
  10. David Gillies Avatar
    David Gillies

    I was at IC when St Mary’s amalgamated also. You’re absolutely right—the medical students were barmy. Us Physicists could put it away, but for sheer, unrestrained debauchery, the trainee doctors were the go-to guys.
    Doctors have a wholly unmerited God complex. They’re at the absolute pinnacle of intellectual hauteur combined with a not-very-academically-challenging career (most doctors I’ve met have not been all that bright. Not stupid, mind, but you can get a medical degree with a 1.5 sigma IQ, which is nothing special). Note the unexamined assumptions that these jumped-up twits make: “Any suggestions to reduce alcohol intake are good,” Any suggestions? How about public flogging? “Not allowing people to consume more than three drinks in a pub is a wonderful solution if it was practical.” Allowing? If I choose to drink myself into an early grave that’s my lookout, and no concern of some stethoscope-toting jackanapes. One of the major problems with the NHS is that its taxpayer-funded nature gives doctors a vastly bigger megaphone than they deserve. The negative externalities of excess alcohol consumption are shared by everyone, rather than redounding on the individual.
    These people need a clip round the ear for being so cheeky.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Discover more from Tim Worstall

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading